Thursday, January 06, 2005

The Conyers Report: What Went Wrong in Ohio

If you are one of those that voted for Kerry and one of those that believes that democracy actually exists as a meaningful system I ask, what will you do about this:

Preserving Democracy: What Went Wrong in Ohio
Status Report of the House Judiciary Committee Democratic Staff

Wednesday 05 January 2005

Executive Summary

Representative John Conyers, Jr., the Ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, asked the Democratic staff to conduct an investigation into irregularities reported in the Ohio presidential election and to prepare a Status Report concerning the same prior to the Joint Meeting of Congress scheduled for January 6, 2005, to receive and consider the votes of the electoral college for president. The following Report includes a brief chronology of the events; summarizes the relevant background law; provides detailed findings (including factual findings and legal analysis); and describes various recommendations for acting on this Report going forward.

We have found numerous, serious election irregularities in the Ohio presidential election, which resulted in a significant disenfranchisement of voters. Cumulatively, these irregularities, which affected hundreds of thousand of votes and voters in Ohio, raise grave doubts regarding whether it can be said the Ohio electors selected on December 13, 2004, were chosen in a manner that conforms to Ohio law, let alone federal requirements and constitutional standards.


Anyone that reads this blog regularly will already know my belief that American democracy is a big lie, a facade. By design it was a deception from inception (hey, that rhymes!) but that's another story altogether. My point here is that if you claim that electoral politics are a valid expression of the people's will, that the vote is a legitimate part of the "democratic" process, is it not your responsibility to defend it given evidence of fraud? Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Green, etc, will you look at and act upon evidence of fraud?

No comments: